Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

RuAF News and development Thread part 15

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • haavarla
    Rank 5 Registered User
    • Dec 2008
    • 6715

    Something is stirring in Mordor these days.. Seriously, this demands a Congratulation for Sukhoi. They never fail to Surprise!
    Thanks

    Comment

    • St. John
      Rank 4 Registered User
      • Jan 2018
      • 568

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zIG_8-IQW0

      Comment

      • blackwood
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • Dec 2011
        • 314

        Well front looks good, but the back with a big nozzle not very stealth, even the skat looked better from the back. It's like they compromised on design. They should have gone 100% stealth then worked around that, I hope iam wrong.

        Comment

        • Marcellogo
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • Jun 2014
          • 1840

          Sssstt, Blackwood! I will reveal you a big,big secret...

          They are doing it by purpose.

          They are showing it without the rear cover, in order to get all western aeronautical experts, armchair generals, F-16net troll posters, eyeball mk1 RCS evaluators and so on to come at your same conclusions and so begin debating between them if it is three-quarter, two thirds or half of a six- fifth of stealth, so forgetting in the meantime to develop an equivalent program (i mean, after that one that started like an UCAV and took ten years to end up as a tanker, remember?).

          After they will have completed the last prototype they need, they will take it to the Black Hole (i.e. Akhubinsk) and mount the cover in secret (and probably conclude that it is not worth the extra cost and loss of performance to protect a rear that would be seen by enemy radars just for the time of a 180 turn before hauling out ass)...
          Last edited by Marcellogo; 27th January 2019, 14:12.

          Comment

          • Marcellogo
            Rank 5 Registered User
            • Jun 2014
            • 1840

            Neither the EDIT button work... (angry emoticon there) .

            Comment

            • Deino
              Rank 5 Registered User
              • Jan 2000
              • 4229

              Nothing works here since two days ... I always end up at the first page without even being able to look at the final posts :-(
              ...

              He was my North, my South, my East and West,
              My working week and my Sunday rest,
              My noon, my midnight, my talk, my song;
              I thought that love would last forever; I was wrong.

              The stars are not wanted now; put out every one:
              Pack up the moon and dismantle the sun;
              Pour away the ocean and sweep up the woods:
              For nothing now can ever come to any good.
              -------------------------------------------------
              W.H.Auden (1945)

              Comment

              • QuantumFX
                What?
                • Dec 2008
                • 1833

                Originally posted by Deino
                https://forum.keypublishing.com/foru...92#post3848097 Nothing works here since two days ... I always end up at the first page without even being able to look at the final posts :-(
                Deino, use the options above the very 1st post of the thread. See below, Larger

                Comment

                • St. John
                  Rank 4 Registered User
                  • Jan 2018
                  • 568

                  Deino, use the arrow to get to page 2, then go up to the address bar and replace '2' with '292' or other. Typing 292 in the box QuantumFX is showing doesn't work for me.

                  Comment

                  • Dr.Snufflebug
                    Boggleboople snufflebug
                    • Aug 2012
                    • 530

                    Forum seems to be working better now, no more manual tags required. Right.

                    So, basically, this drone is a big thing for sure. Judging by the dimensions that one can surmise from the photos and comparisons on the previous page it has the same (or nearly the same) "footprint" as an Su-57, and being a flying wing UCAV, it's ever so slightly larger than the X-47B. People over at Paralay found photos of an Su-34 being towed by the same K-700 tractor, and the drone appears to be similar in size, so yeah...

                    The engine fitted to it is certainly a Saturn/Lyulka Al-31/41 ditto, so it'd provide something around 90-100 kilonewtons dry (and there is no reason to believe it's afterburning). High subsonic, in other words. Clear analogies can be drawn to the X-47B here too, which from memory has an F-15 style P&W F100.

                    The rear end so to speak appears hardly finished on the drone, with a big rectangular cut-out, so expect changes in that region if/when this contraption ever enters service.

                    Difficult to say anything about all the various sensors and antennas scattered across it, as it's very clearly an early prototype and a lot of those things are bound to be temporary. The radome appears to be of a rather small diameter, quite possibly housing something akin to the Su-57 cheek (and posterial?) arrays, rather than a fighter-sized frontal AESA.
                    sigpic

                    Comment

                    • Marcellogo
                      Rank 5 Registered User
                      • Jun 2014
                      • 1840

                      Let's start from the sure data: 20-ton class (be it loaded or MTOW), flying wing and a single engine.

                      It means a little more than a Su-17 or MiG-27 with an engine of the same category (although much more modern) but without the possibility of going supersonic.

                      So even is seems as wide as a Flanker/Su-57 it's in reality much more lighter (flying wings are quite deceiving in this regard as they have a very little body), so to be produced in big quantities.

                      At the same time it would have a great fuel fraction, allowing it to reach great distances (3500-4000 kmts) while carrying in its internal bay weapons that wouldn't fit in Su-57's ones.

                      Although being able to locate and engage their own target by themselves they would in the same time not operating autonomously but in strict coordination /under direct control of Su-57 or even more conventional fighters that would also act as their escort .

                      Summing all those thing together, as already expressed in humorous form I didn't expect serial Okholnik to end up much more different from what the prototype already show, no obyekt 30 (better to use it on A2A planes ) but the already proven and cheap Al31/41 , some improvement in rear RCS but without installing a complete engine cover, above all at expense of TVC.
                      It is not an Hale recon plane that have to loiter hours above the battlefield but a deep strike/battle area interdiction drone that have to flight straight to its own objectives, drop bombs/missiles and came back a.s.a.p.

                      Also because for what I see its expected rear RCS already now is absolutely comparable or better with all the probability already inferior of those of F-35 and Su-57.
                      Last edited by Marcellogo; 25th January 2019, 23:04.

                      Comment

                      • LMFS
                        Rank 4 Registered User
                        • Feb 2018
                        • 562

                        Marcellogo

                        If the goal was the deep strike based on speed (as inferred from your bit: flight straight to its own objectives, drop bombs/missiles and came back a.s.a.p.), a supercruise capable plane as Su-57 would be much better. Without all-aspect LO (including IR) a slow plane like these flying wings would have no chance to escape SAMs, unless using expensive, very long range stand-off weapons which allow already existing fighters to strike safely. Of course an unmanned plane is much more expendable than a manned one, but the whole sense of flying wings is broad-band, all aspect stealth and huge persistence close to the battlefield, so they can spread, wait / watch undetected for many hours and be activated for a strike as needed. Otherwise the SAM crews have it too easy, knowing when the enemy planes come and how long can they stay in the area until they have to go back. But with planes that can stay undetected and on the watch relatively close to them almost 24/7, the scenario changes quite a bit.

                        Comment

                        • panzerfeist1
                          Rank 6 Registered User
                          • Feb 2018
                          • 415

                          Dr.Snufflebug

                          https://i-hls.com/archives/84130

                          "Radio-photonic radars for unmanned aerial vehicles and aircraft will be created in Russia in several years to get an accurate target image. Radio-photonic radars are expected to be mounted on Russian sixth-generation fighter jets. This station sees considerably further than a conventional radar and will be capable of building actually a photographic image of the target that will be identified automatically.

                          According to tass.com, RTI Group is completing R&D work in 2018 on creating a mockup of the X-band radio-photonic radar. Following its results, specialists will determine a principal scheme of building the radio-photonic locator, which will make it possible in several years to build prototypes of super-light and small-size radars for unmanned aerial vehicles.

                          pg 33
                          https://www.niip.ru/upload/iblock/4c8/4c89c11ae741be234a5f900b3fb41e86.pdf

                          "The first platform for our latest radar will most likely be an advanced Russian-built unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). We believe the radar designed for a heavy UAV will be able to scan airspace with the 200-km radius. A medium UAV will need a synthetic aperture radar with the 3050-cm resolution in the ground mapping mode round the clock at any weather. Some of the data gathered will be processed on board and the other will be fed to ground-based command posts."

                          I am assuming that the heavy UAV they are talking about is the Okhotnik-B. Both sources are talking about radio-optical AESA. The Okhotnik as far as I know has not flown yet, but they expect it to fly in Spring. I am assuming the ideal radar would be ROFAR. Radar coverage is expected to be 360 degrees. They gave the SAR resolution for a Medium UAV 4 years ago but have said nothing about the resolution for a heavy UAV but they did give a 200km range for the heavy UAV.

                          "
                          "RTI Group is launching the first technological line in Russia for the production of lasers for making promising radio-photonic radars," the press office said."



                          I thought the fall of western civilization was a tragedy, now I realize it's a comedy.

                          Comment

                          • TR1
                            TR1
                            http://tiny.cc/tp8kd
                            • Oct 2010
                            • 9826

                            Drone looks great, but supposed insiders claim the engine is a placeholder (afterburner is not even hooked up). However is supposedly a 117S with TVC.
                            Last edited by TR1; 26th January 2019, 05:27.
                            sigpic

                            Comment

                            • Marcellogo
                              Rank 5 Registered User
                              • Jun 2014
                              • 1840

                              LMFS

                              ??? For a SAM the only way to see the rear part of an incoming plane is when it pass over the system itself or almost within such an angle in which engine is not covered by the wings or the body of the plane itself.

                              Even in such last case (as passing directly over an enemy SAM site would be either quite idiotic or particularly unfortunate) the plane will be moving away from the SAM site anyway so you woldn't benefitno doppler effect there, engagement range of both radar and missiles would be so reduced of an amount superior to the relative gain in RCS due to the use of F-35/Su-57 style round nozzles instead of B-2 covered exhaust .
                              The faulty in reasoning there is that you are considering a exposed nozzle as something having not any RCS measures at all on it and not as an equivalent to the ones that above mentioned planed already have or even better as in this case there are not tail surfaces to consider.

                              They could have however a greater vulnerability when confronted by enemy fighters that can pursue them at a greater speed than theirs (as in this case you get doppler beam sharpening effect), hence my belief than they would always operate together with Su-57 both controlling than protecting them,
                              For what I know they have in any case decided to develop a lighter drone directly derived by SKAT for ISR missions and in this case I expect it to have a complete engine cover, given its primary mission would require loitering around instead.

                              In any case time would tell, they are just at the first prototype.

                              Last edited by Marcellogo; 26th January 2019, 11:21.

                              Comment

                              • haavarla
                                Rank 5 Registered User
                                • Dec 2008
                                • 6715

                                Drone looks great, but supposed insiders claim the engine is a placeholder (afterburner is not even hooked up). However is supposedly a 117S with TVC.

                                Quite typical of Sukhoi.
                                No need to re-invent the wheel here, they just go with off the shelf products like the 117 engines. Quite possible the thing got the very same FCS as is in both Su-35S and Su-57. Should lower development cost for sure.
                                Just with different software coding for aerodynamical handling ofc.

                                I hope they made the W-bays larger vs on the PakFa. It would make sense since it only have two of em.
                                But the question remains.. what will be its primely Mission. Recon is my guess, The thing looks like it got long legs, and in that regard, perhaps the W-bays are not that big due to lots of fuel capacity stored.

                                Nice to have u back Tr1 and a happy new year.
                                Last edited by haavarla; 26th January 2019, 12:14.
                                Thanks

                                Comment

                                • Austin
                                  Rank 5 Registered User
                                  • Oct 2003
                                  • 6506

                                  Hunter may have capability to go supersonic if required


                                  Russia Developing New Supersonic Attack Drone

                                  https://i-hls.com/archives/81761
                                  Speaking to a television channel, Alexander Nemov, deputy chief of the research department at the 30th Central Scientific Research Institute outside Moscow, confirmed that the large unmanned aircraft would appear sometime in the next few years.

                                  Development work is currently underway on a long-range unmanned system capable of carrying out unmanned low-altitude supersonic flights, and striking both stationary and mobile targets at operational-strategic depth, the officer explained.
                                  "A map does you no good if you don't know where you are"

                                  Comment

                                  • TomcatViP
                                    Rank 5 Registered User
                                    • Nov 2011
                                    • 6125

                                    Isn't it time to set a new thread for the beast?

                                    Comment

                                    • LMFS
                                      Rank 4 Registered User
                                      • Feb 2018
                                      • 562

                                      Marcellogo

                                      Well, don't forget that after releasing their ordnance the strike aircraft is supposed to egress. And of course is to expect that serious IADs will count with passive SAM launchers ready to ambush any attacking plane penetrating their air space, so rear aspect of course counts. Check this diagram by APA for a more complete information of what I say:

                                      https://www.ausairpower.net/XIMG/JSF-RCS-Angles-4.png

                                      On the other hand, your reasoning regarding Doppler effect would make difficult to explain any aircraft having hidden nozzles, which is essentially all subsonic stealth designs. I don't have numbers for this detection range loss due to to negative doppler shift, maybe you have a reference? The beam sharpening you mention applies to SAR as far as I know... Also curious how you know RCS of LO axisymmetrical nozzles and also how you compare them to the flat type used in supposedly stealthier designs? BTW I am considering the nozzle that I am seeing, not potential ones with LO design. IR stealth is also very relevant, and the fact that there are no tails to hide the nozzle only makes this issue more critical in flying wings.

                                      Finally, the point you make regarding enemy fighters should consider also IRST and the increased detection ranges a nozzle like the present one would grant them, without any of the advantages supersonic fighters get from such nozzle design

                                      TR1

                                      Interesting thanks. I was thinking: maybe having TVC is a good way of exploring the flight envelope of the plane and recover it in case something goes wrong (as a sort of recovery chute)?? Who knows xD

                                      Austin
                                      Hunter may have capability to go supersonic if required
                                      I think they refer to a different drone. Such role was covered specifically by swing-wing planes like F-111, Su-24 and Tornado. Supersonic flight at low altitudes is especially hard due the to massive drag to overcome.
                                      Last edited by LMFS; 26th January 2019, 16:45.

                                      Comment

                                      • TomcatViP
                                        Rank 5 Registered User
                                        • Nov 2011
                                        • 6125

                                        Originally posted by LMFS
                                        Such role was covered specifically by swing-wing planes like F-111, Su-24 and Tornado. Supersonic flight at low altitudes is especially hard due the to massive drag to overcome.
                                        4 October 1977 - F-104RB - Red Baron - Darryl Greenamyer - World absolute low altitude speed record of 988.26 mph (1.590.5kmh)

                                        With his own build hybrid F-104 Starfighter powered by a former US NAVY Phantom J-79 engine, Darryl managed to reach an official world absolute low altitude speed record of 988.26 mph (1,606km/h) at Mud Lake near Tonopah, Nevada.
                                        But obviously man can arg that the Starfirghter didn't really had a set of wings

                                        Source:
                                        http://www.i-f-s.nl/f-104-records/

                                        Comment

                                        • Marcellogo
                                          Rank 5 Registered User
                                          • Jun 2014
                                          • 1840

                                          LMFS

                                          I have already made a distinction between strike planes/drones and ISR platform that have to loiter for a long time in a certain zone.
                                          For the rest I have the impression that they ar planning to get the okhotnik finished as soon as possible and cheap enough to be produced at a fast rate, maybe i'm wrong but i'll wait and see.

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X